People v. Daoud CA5

Filed 5/20/24 P. v. Daoud CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE, F086962 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. F21906933) v.

AMR AHMAD DAOUD, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County. Samuel Dalesandro, Judge. Heather E. Shallenberger, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

* Before Franson, Acting P. J., Meehan, J. and DeSantos, J.

Appellate counsel for defendant Amr Ahmad Daoud has filed an opening brief summarizing the pertinent facts and raising no issues but asking this court to review the record independently. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende).) The opening brief also includes a declaration from appellate counsel stating defendant was advised of his right to file a brief of his own with this court. By letter dated March 14, 2024, we also invited defendant to submit additional briefing. Defendant filed a late response, which we received on May 13, 2024. Pursuant to Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436 and People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, we have reviewed the entire record. Following our Supreme Court’s direction in Kelly, we provide a brief description of the facts and the procedural history of the case. (Kelly, at p. 110.) Finding no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, we affirm. PROCEDURAL SUMMARY Following a preliminary hearing, an information was filed on May 27, 2022, charging defendant with three counts of carrying a concealed dirk or dagger (Pen. Code,1 § 21310, a felony; counts 1–3). Following several continuances,2 but before defendant was formally arraigned, defense counsel requested that section 1368 proceedings be instituted as doubts had arisen about defendant’s competency. The trial court granted this request on January 19, 2023. After an evaluation was submitted to the court pursuant to section 1369 on March 23, 2023, defendant was found not competent. An additional order was entered at that time allowing for the involuntary medication of defendant by a treating psychiatrist. Another evaluation addressing a potential placement for defendant